** OWL 2 Implementation report - QuOnto **
1. Contributors (in alphabetical order)
Claudio Corona, Marco Ruzzi, Domenico Fabio Savo
SAPIENZA University of Rome
2. The name of your system, a URL for its website (if any), and a one-sentence
description.
QuOnto - http://www.dis.uniroma1.it/~quonto/ <http://hermit-reasoner.com>
QuOnto is an OWL 2 QL reasoner.
3. Which profile(s) it implements (DL, EL, QL, RL, or Full). We
would appreciate some brief commentary about why you chose those
profiles, and what sort of implementation techniques you are
using.
QuOnto was originally born as a DLLite[_A] implementation. Being the OWL 2 QL profile based on DLLite, we built a version of QuOnto specifically tailored for OWL 2 QL.
4. Which semantics you implement (direct or rdf-based), and
(optionally) why.
We implement direct semantics.
5. Do you believe your system currently conforms to the OWL 2
Candidate Recommendation? Does it pass all the test cases for
your profile? If not, which features does it lack and/or which
test cases does it not yet pass? Do you have plans to make it
conformant, and make it pass all the test cases?
We believe that QuOnto is fully conformat, for a restricted set of datatypes. It passes all required
tests and extra credit tests.
6. Did you implement the "at risk" features, owl:rational and
rdf:XMLLiteral? If not, do you intend to, or do you think we
should remove them from OWL 2?
QuOnto does not support rationals and rdf:XMLLiteral, but we intend to.
7. Finally, we'd appreciate your evaluation of whether the OWL 2
Candidate Recommendation is ready to proceed along the standards
track toward being a W3C Recommendation. If not, please be sure
to tell us what problems you think we need to address.
We see no problems with proceeding to Recommendation.
-
Claudio Corona,
Marco Ruzzi,
Domenico Fabio Savo.